Blaming Ahmad
Ahmad Chalabi has blurted out to London?s Daily Telegraph that it really doesn't matter whether his Iraqi National Congress was right or wrong on the information it fed the U.S. government on Saddam Hussein?s alleged WMD.
As he put it: ?As far as we?re concerned we?ve been entirely successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in Baghdad. What was said before is not important. The Bush administration is looking for a scapegoat. We?re ready to fall on our swords if he wants.?
That might sound outrageous, briefly, but in the end can anyone blame Chalabi for helping lead the U.S. into the Iraq war? Far more asinine is this statement by a senior American official in Baghdad: ?What the INC told us formed one part of the intelligence picture. But what Chalabi told us we accepted in good faith. Now there is going to be a lot of question marks over his motives.?
Two things come to mind: Chalabi?s motives were always very clear, so question marks are really unnecessary; and since when is high policy, particularly war, based on accepting anything in ?good faith??